[ruby-talk:00551] Re: A new discussion topic ;-)

Hi,

In message "[ruby-talk:00544] Re: A new discussion topic ;-)"
    on 99/08/02, Clemens Hintze <[e-mail]> writes:

|>concept).  Designing a language really is fun.  Why don't you join the
|>game, Clemens? :-)
|
|Do you say that to indicate, that I have too much changing proposals?
|;-)

No.  Definitely, no.  Your comments, proposals, ideas, and questions
are always welcome.  Your idea in [ruby-talk:00539] does seem like for
the new language, so I said why don't you develop your one.

|If I would design a a language today, it would be very similar with
|Ruby. So similar, that I feel it would not makes sense to begin with
|it!

Thank you.

|Hmmm! But what can you do with classes, that you cannot do with the
|prototype paradigm of Self?

Of cource, of cource.  It's not about WHAT they can, but HOW they can.
Simplicity is not my main concern.  I'm not minimalist.

With classes some things go easier, so that I don't have to abondon
classes.  For exapmle, suppose you are explaining the prototype based
language;  you are going to say like this:

  String objects have methods like chop, reverse, lower, etc.

You have to mention something like class anyway.  So why do you have
to remove it from the language.

|>In addition, `^' prefix notation is pretty interesting, too.
|
|I have tried to build it in into the Ruby interpreter to play a
|little bit with that syntax. But I must say, that I have not much
|experience yet. It didn't work at all :-}

Hmm, I didn't think you are going to add it to the Ruby.  It changes
inheritance model a lot.

|Please going on to be patient with my ideas :-)

Sure.
                                                matz.